Poll: Do you agree on voting guidelines

[SirMaverick]

Agree on following voting guidelines:

• do not edit polls without confirmation of poll creater
• ask broader questions first: if you see a problem don't poll for possible solutions directly, make a first poll to see if it's a general opinion that there is a problem, than make a second poll with solutions proposed in first poll
• try to limit the options (-> broader questions first)
• use specific options ("method tbd"/"somethings else" are not specific) - else you can't be sure what you are voting for

[SirMaverick]

Saktoth said:

It is my opinion that we have never had problems with people changing poll names. Usually they are just being helpful to clarify the meaning. Also, you say broader questions then specific questions. Method TBD means 'we go this direction but specific implimentation requires an extra vote' IE, meets criteria 2 and 3 you have listed here. If you want to set solid voting policies i suggest we vote on it!

[SirMaverick]

It is my opinion that we have never had problems with people changing poll names.

But with adding options.

Also, you say broader questions then specific questions. Method TBD means 'we go this direction but specific implimentation requires an extra vote' IE, meets criteria 2 and 3 you have listed here.

It might still depend on the details and you should not mix broader and specific questions.

If you want to set solid voting policies i suggest we vote on it!

+1

[SirMaverick]

The motivation behind the guideline is to make voting process easier.

 The boost vote is a good example why it's difficult. I think there were options added - did everyone notice/revote if there is a better option for him now? The discussion includes the idea of completely removing boost while more than 50% of voters don't want to remove boost. Mix of broader and specific questions - I could accept other options when I knew exact details.

1 vote, 2 weeks of discussion and we don't really have a decision - that's where the guidelines help.

[Saktoth]

You say 'Be Broad' then 'Be specific'. Its very bad to adopt guidelines that are so vague.

We dont have a descision on boost because we dont have a solution!

Adding options is good if none of them appeal to you or you think you can find a compromise.

Its pretty clear which way the vote is going: No. But we are still discussing it, which is why its still open.

[SirMaverick]

You say 'Be Broad' then 'Be specific'. Its very bad to adopt guidelines that are so vague.

This is only needed for complex tasks that can't be decided by a yes/no vote. (English is not my native language, maybe the chosen words aren't clear enough.) "Broader" means to identify a problem/a general direction (change needed? yes or no). If Yes, in the "specific" phase there will be vote about actual solutions.

I want to prevent that less than 50% of devs discuss a solution where more than 50% don't see a problem.

We dont have a descision on boost because we dont have a solution!

Then why are we voting? Organizational waste. Discuss/suggest possible solutions first.

Adding options is good if none of them appeal to you or you think you can find a compromise.

This will lead to too many options and no clear decision.

[Google Frog]

I use the initial votes more as option gathers, I don't know all the options that people think of before the vote is created. The first vote is often the 'be broad' vote.

[SirMaverick]

Doing all in one and encouraging vote changes within one vote does not show a clear development. That's why I like to see 2 votes. I will be easier to follow the voting process and understand why people voted that way or changed opinion.

[SirMaverick]

Trying to establish guidelines, but vote is conflicting with them.

[SirMaverick]

Winner: No (22%)

[SirMaverick]

It only concerns a minority of votes. Atm I don't see much need for action to bring this up in another form.